Thank you Jo! Op do 3 sep. 2020 om 10:41 schreef Jo <[email protected]>:
> I had a look at them after downloading them using Overpass API and started > making them continuous where they were 'broken'. So I went ahead and also > converted them all to rcn. > > Jo > > On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 9:41 AM Jo <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Joost, >> >> In Flanders it depended more on topology than anything else. We used: >> >> lcn: for loops >> rcn: for the numbered node networks, this logic was taken to rwn and rhn >> later on >> ncn: for long routes going from A to B (LFx) and then later for the Fxxx >> cycle highways >> icn: for European routes going from A to B >> >> In Brussels rcn doesn't seem to be used and those routes are >> topologically more similar to the numbered routes system used in Flanders >> and Wallonia. >> >> I agree with you that it makes more sense to tag them as rcn. >> >> Jo >> >> On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 9:14 AM joost schouppe <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I was always a little confused that the regional cycle network is mapped >>> as lcn in Brussels. Since this network is organized by Brussels-the-region, >>> not Brussels-the-city, it seems logical that it should have the rcn tag. In >>> fact, more so than the Flemish cycle node network, which is composed of >>> several networks and almost by coincidence covers the region. >>> >>> This is also what we say in the wiki: >>> >>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Cycle_Routes#Itin.C3.A9raires_Cyclables_R.C3.A9gionaux_-_Gewestelijke_Fietsroute >>> >>> But the example given there (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9623 >>> I believe), is now mapped as an lcn. >>> >>> Looking at the edit history, it looks like there was a minor edit war >>> about this, where user RoRay repeatedly changed it from rcn to lcn >>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/8141976 >>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/12902663 >>> (RoRay is still mapping, still using the not-very helpful default >>> changeset description "update") >>> >>> User BenoitL tried to change it back to rcn (with much better changeset >>> comments :) - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/12849599), but I >>> guess he gave up. Polyglot later seems to have mapped most of the other >>> routes; my guess is he just went with lcn because that's how the others >>> were mapped. >>> >>> Apart from the network not showing up when it should on some maps, it >>> doesn't really matter much. However, bxl-forever is now mapping -actual- >>> lcn routes in the Brussels region, operated by Anderlecht municipality. >>> Example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11544325 >>> Putting both types of routes in the same level is just wrong IMHO. >>> >>> Can anyone provide some more context? Based on my own research, I'd >>> suggest we simply retag all the regional operated routes from lcn to rcn. >>> >>> Best, >>> Joost Schouppe >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Talk-be mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be >>> >> _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > -- Joost Schouppe OpenStreetMap <http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/joost%20schouppe/> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/joostjakob> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/joost-schouppe/48/939/603> | Meetup <http://www.meetup.com/OpenStreetMap-Belgium/members/97979802/>
_______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
